Difference between revisions of "California Labor Codes 5402"

From Wcc
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[California| California]] > [[California_Labor_Codes#5402| Labor Codes]]
 
[[California| California]] > [[California_Labor_Codes#5402| Labor Codes]]
=== § 5402 Knowledge of injury; Limitation on medical liability===
+
=== § 5402 Employer's knowledge equivalent to notice; employer's notice to employee or employee's dependents===
  
 
<table border="0" width="95%">
 
<table border="0" width="95%">
 
<tr>
 
<tr>
 
<td width="80%" valign="top">History:  
 
<td width="80%" valign="top">History:  
*[[California_Labor Codes_5402_637| Knowledge of injury; Limitation on medical liability]]
+
*[[California_Labor Codes_5402_637| Amended by Stats 2004, CH 34, effective 4/19/04]]
<br><br>(a) Knowledge of an injury, obtained from any source, on the part of an employer, his or her managing agent, superintendent, foreman, or other person in authority, or knowledge of the assertion of a claim of injury sufficient to afford opportunity to the employer to make an investigation into the facts, is equivalent to service under Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5400| 5400]].
+
*[[California_Labor Codes_5402_1080| Amended by SB 863; Effective Jan. 1, 2013]]
 
+
<br><br>(a)�Knowledge of an injury, obtained from any source, on the part of an employer, his or her managing agent, superintendent, foreman, or other person in authority, or knowledge of the assertion of a claim of injury sufficient to afford opportunity to the employer to make an investigation into the facts, is equivalent to service under Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5400| 5400]].
(b) If liability is not rejected within 90 days after the date the claim form is filed under Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5401| 5401]], the injury shall be presumed compensable under this division. The presumption of this subdivision is rebuttable only by evidence discovered subsequent to the 90-day period.
+
(b)�If liability is not rejected within 90 days after the date the claim form is filed under Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5401| 5401]], the injury shall be presumed compensable under this division. The presumption of this subdivision is rebuttable only by evidence discovered subsequent to the 90-day period.
 
+
(c)�Within one working day after an employee files a claim form under Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5401| 5401]], the employer shall authorize the provision of all treatment, consistent with Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5307.27| 5307.27]], for the alleged injury and shall continue to provide the treatment until the date that liability for the claim is accepted or rejected. Until the date the claim is accepted or rejected, liability for medical treatment shall be limited to ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
(c) Within one working day after an employee files a claim form under Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5401| 5401]], the employer shall authorize the provision of all treatment, consistent with Section [[California_Labor_Codes_5307.27| 5307.27]] or the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine's Occupational Medicine Practice Guidelines, for the alleged injury and shall continue to provide the treatment until the date that liability for the claim is accepted or rejected. Until the date the claim is accepted or rejected, liability for medical treatment shall be limited to ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
+
(d)�Treatment provided under subdivision (c) shall not give rise to a presumption of liability on the part of the employer.
 
+
(d) Treatment provided under subdivision (c) shall not give rise to a presumption of liability on the part of the employer.
+
 
</td>
 
</td>
 
<td width="3">&nbsp;</td>
 
<td width="3">&nbsp;</td>
Line 18: Line 16:
  
 
<div id="link1">
 
<div id="link1">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=249106212812491&state=CA Maranian v. WCAB]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=249106212812491&state=ca Maranian v. WCAB]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 24: Line 22:
  
 
<div id="link2">
 
<div id="link2">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=249208212372492&state=CA SCIF v. WCAB (Welcher)]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=249208212372492&state=ca SCIF v. WCAB (Welcher)]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 30: Line 28:
  
 
<div id="link3">
 
<div id="link3">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=290012212202900&state=CA Honeywell vs. WCAB (Wagner)]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=290012212202900&state=ca Honeywell vs. WCAB (Wagner)]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 36: Line 34:
  
 
<div id="link4">
 
<div id="link4">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=290104212662901&state=CA Wagner vs. Allied Signal]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=290104212662901&state=ca Wagner vs. Allied Signal]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 42: Line 40:
  
 
<div id="link5">
 
<div id="link5">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=4070721239407&state=CA Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. WCAB (Daly City)]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=4070721239407&state=ca Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. WCAB (Daly City)]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 48: Line 46:
  
 
<div id="link6">
 
<div id="link6">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=b230q05l2371403st31l10&state=CA Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. Diaz]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=b230q05l2371403st31l10&state=ca Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. Diaz]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 54: Line 52:
  
 
<div id="link7">
 
<div id="link7">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=b43b05v778313xy3d56rzp&state=CA Honeywell vs. WCAB (Wagner) (Cal Sup Crt)]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=b43b05v778313xy3d56rzp&state=ca Honeywell vs. WCAB (Wagner) (Cal Sup Crt)]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 60: Line 58:
  
 
<div id="link8">
 
<div id="link8">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=l250n07m1724777de5a8ob&state=CA Muna v. WCAB]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=l250n07m1724777de5a8ob&state=ca Muna v. WCAB]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 66: Line 64:
  
 
<div id="link9">
 
<div id="link9">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=l351z05a1558007jk32n14&state=CA Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. v. WCAB (Moody)]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=l351z05a1558007jk32n14&state=ca Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. v. WCAB (Moody)]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
Line 72: Line 70:
  
 
<div id="link10">
 
<div id="link10">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=p266y04n1278971ab36w36&state=CA Williams vs. WCAB]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=o154t10y1571155uv3s23w&state=ca Mendoza v. Huntington Hospital]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
<div id="explanation10" style="display:none">Note: Presumption of compensability applies even if claim is accepted then denied after 90 days.</div>
+
<div id="explanation10" style="display:none">Note: [En Banc] AD Rule 30(d)(3) is invalid because it conflicts with sections 4060(c) and 4062.2 and exceeds the scope of section 5402(b).</div>
  
 
<div id="link11">
 
<div id="link11">
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=x329d04s541238mn0e43zt&state=CA Leinon vs Fishermen's Grotto (#2)]
+
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=p266y04n1278971ab36w36&state=ca Williams vs. WCAB]
 +
</div>
 +
 
 +
<div id="explanation11" style="display:none">Note: Presumption of compensability applies even if claim is accepted then denied after 90 days.</div>
 +
 
 +
<div id="link12">
 +
[http://www.workcompcentral.com/members/index.php?fa=wiki_redirect&case_no=x329d04s541238mn0e43zt&state=ca Leinon vs Fishermen's Grotto (#2)]
 
</div>
 
</div>
  
<div id="explanation11" style="display:none">Note: When indemnity becomes due under 4650 does not depend on whether denial was 'wrong' under 5402.</div>
+
<div id="explanation12" style="display:none">Note: When indemnity becomes due under 4650 does not depend on whether denial was 'wrong' under 5402.</div>
  
 
</td>
 
</td>

Latest revision as of 13:12, 19 June 2013

California > Labor Codes

§ 5402 Employer's knowledge equivalent to notice; employer's notice to employee or employee's dependents

History:



(a)�Knowledge of an injury, obtained from any source, on the part of an employer, his or her managing agent, superintendent, foreman, or other person in authority, or knowledge of the assertion of a claim of injury sufficient to afford opportunity to the employer to make an investigation into the facts, is equivalent to service under Section 5400. (b)�If liability is not rejected within 90 days after the date the claim form is filed under Section 5401, the injury shall be presumed compensable under this division. The presumption of this subdivision is rebuttable only by evidence discovered subsequent to the 90-day period. (c)�Within one working day after an employee files a claim form under Section 5401, the employer shall authorize the provision of all treatment, consistent with Section 5307.27, for the alleged injury and shall continue to provide the treatment until the date that liability for the claim is accepted or rejected. Until the date the claim is accepted or rejected, liability for medical treatment shall be limited to ten thousand dollars ($10,000). (d)�Treatment provided under subdivision (c) shall not give rise to a presumption of liability on the part of the employer.

  Relevant Case Law